Teachers, policymakers and project learning: The questionable use of 'hard' and 'soft' policy instruments to influence the implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong

Teachers, policymakers and project learning: The questionable use of 'hard' and 'soft' policy instruments to influence the implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong

• Fok, Ping Kwan Chinese University of Hong Kong
• Kennedy, Kerry J. Hong Kong Institute of Education
• Chan, Jacqueline Kin Sang Hong Kong Institute of Education

International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership, 5(6), 1-14, 2010

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

2010

• F Learning & Teaching
  • FA General Teaching Strategies, Different Instructional Methods
• M Teachers & Education for Teachers
  • MG Identities, Attitudes & Opinion of Educational Workers
• R Educational Policy & Administration
  • RC Educational Planning & Decision Making Process, Educational Administration
• R Educational Policy & Administration
  • RE School Management, School-Parents Relationship

Curriculum Development Educational Change Foreign Countries Program Implementation Teacher Attitudes Public Officials Teaching Methods Elementary Secondary Education Student Projects Active Learning Educational Assessment Surveys Educational Policy Hong Kong

• Hong Kong

• 1997.7 onwards

• Primary Education
• Secondary Education

• View Full Text 全文連結

Following the return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, the government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region developed wide-ranging curriculum reforms, including project learning. A recent survey has indicated that over 80% of Hong Kong primary and secondary schools have adopted project learning as a curriculum task. Such an outcome is hard to reconcile both with the culture of Hong Kong schools and the generally bleak picture that pervades the literature on educational change.In seeking an explanation for this apparent success we focus attention on the policy instruments that were used by government agencies to facilitate the process of implementation. Our analysis revealed that teachers were caught in a pincer movement that involved voluntary activities promoting project learning and coercive measures that monitored and evaluated successful implementation. Teachers' views of these policy instruments differed markedly from those of policymakers. This confluence of mixed approaches, while apparently successful, is also shown to be problematic. Finally, the paper is located in a theoretical framework with its origins in recent policy theory that to date has not been applied to educational contexts.
[Copyright of International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership is the property of Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Access via Directory of Open Access Journals: http://journals.sfu.ca/ijepl/index.php/ijepl]

• English

Journal Articles

• 15555062

https://bibliography.lib.eduhk.hk/bibs/7a4ff0d6

2011-01-20